Epstein Secrets

pressive." A grand jury subpoena must be reasonable, and, in making that determination, "what is reasonable depends on the context." New Jersey v. T.L.O. , 469 U.S. 325, 337 (1985). Likewise, whether a subpoena is oppressive depends on the context. In re August, 1993 Regular Grand Jury , 854E Supp. 13

. in the hands of an attorney—or printing out such records for an attorney to review—does not render the documents privileged or work product. See Ratliff v. Davis Polk & Wardwell , 354 F.3d 165, 170-71 (2d Cir. 2003) ("Documents obtain no special protection because they are housed in a law firm; any o

se arguments fail for the same reasons. First, the computers and their contents are not "communications," they are pre-existing documents and, as in Ratliff , putting them into the hands of an attorney (or his investigator) does not convert them into "privileged" communications. Second, the removal of th

oppressive." A grand jury subpoena must be reasonable, and, in making that determination, "what is reasonable depends on the context." New Jersey. T.L.O. , 469 U.S. 325, 337 (1985). Likewise, whether a subpoena is oppressive depends on the context. In re August, 1993 Regular Grand Jury , 854E Supp. 13

. in the hands of an attorney—or printing out such records for an attorney to review—does not render the documents privileged or work product. See Ratliff I Davis Polk & Wardwell , 354 F.3d 165, 170-71 (2d Cir. 2003) ("Documents obtain no special protection because they are housed in a law firm; any

se arguments fail for the same reasons. First, the computers and their contents are not "communications," they are pre-existing documents and, as in Ratliff , putting them into the hands of an attorney (or his investigator) does not convert them into "privileged" communications. Second, the removal of th

ppressive." A grand July subpoena must be reasonable, and, in making that determination, "what is reasonable depends on the context." New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325, 337 (1985). Likewise, whether a subpoena is oppressive depends on the context. In re August, 1993 Regular Grand Jury, 854 F. Supp. 13

.. in the hands of an attorney—or printing out such records for an attorney to review—does not render the documents privileged or work product. See Ratliff v. Davis Polk & Wardwell, 354 F.3d 165, 170-71 (2d Cir. 2003) ("Documents obtain no special protection because they are housed in a law firm; any o